🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@freemo The responses about mixed strategies are on-point mathematically/from a game theory perspective, but if you are talking about real-life scenarios (where no one really uses “optimal” strategies due to information constraints etc.) it might be convenient to use gaming terminology. In this case you could say you are “playing the meta[game]” – most people use a strategy currently considered very good and you find a strategy that might be bad in a vacuum, but counters the specific one everyone uses. Quite common in competitive e-sports, whether SC2 or Dota or whatnot.

@freemo Sounds like it's inconceivable!

@freemo So it seems!

https://qoto.org/@tripu/109800583585516619

@trinsec @freemo Well now all I can see is disco bender! 😂😂😂
"Bite my groovy metal ass!"

@freemo Looks like Bender going to a disco.

@freemo Woof, I’m technically a neoliberal and a conservative in the narrow academic polisci sense of these terms. Which of course means I can’t stand most of the things popularly done by folks who claim to be them.

@freepeoplesfreepress @freemo Strongly disagree. Companies are just collectives of people, and they have the right to free speech as well. On their property, they should be able to control the narrative and tone; that's their speech right. Just as it's our right to leave their property if we don't like the way they run things.

Free speech doesn't mean a right to compel others to host your speech.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Fediverse isn't just an American thing, and CDA 230 is only an American law.

That being said, people mistakenly think that CDA 230 protects platforms from the consequences of free speech that occurs on them, but that's not accurate: It protects platforms from the consequences of moderation, both by protecting them from liability for moderation and for protecting them from liability for failing to moderate.

Prior to CDA 230, two cases tested liability in the case of platforms mdoerating or not moderating their content.

CompuServe and Prodigy both offered online forums, but CompuServe chose not to moderate, while Prodigy did.

CompuServe was sued over content on their forums, and the case was dismissed. Prodigy, however, got in trouble. The judge in their case ruled that “they exercised editorial control — so you’re more like a newspaper than a newsstand,” Kosseff said.

I suspect that in many cases around the world the law would look the same, since it doesn't make sense to hold for example a 7-11 liable for the content of the newspapers they sell.

Okay. $dayjob has gotten to the point where I need to do something about it.

I'm officially looking for other opportunities in the sysadmin/IT/devops/etc space. I've been a linux/unix sysadmin generalist for ~20 years now and I'd like to apply my considerable skills and experience to the aid of some organization seeking to do good things in the world.

You can find my resume at https://github.com/48kRAM/resume (Yes, my resume has a Makefile)

Open to both remote positions but also to relocation. I enjoy having my hands on hardware and fixing problems. And, of course, I'll bring all the retro gaming nerdery with me.

I'd love to #getfedihired :)

Thanks

bioluminsecent bacteria update

@freemo Oops here's the link: https://all-dressed-programming.com/posts/amazing-typst/

@post @freemo @feld your point is flawed for many reasons:
- first the summary of evidence of non homogeneous and low quality studies doesn't give you an increased quality of evidence, this is the foundation of MAs and they knew, so they state quite clearly what we can say and what we can not with those results
- second, It seems that you miss the idea behind hypothesis testing and you are doing one of the biggest mistake in biostat: absence of proofs is not a proof itself